EPTReasons for Gun Control? - Page 5
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
DONTPANIC
United States340 Posts
| ||
|
seupac
Canada148 Posts
its a really good point that 34% of prisoners were scared off by their victims guns! im sure these prisoners are thankful that they all had access to weapons so that they could return fire. liberal gun laws make robbery much more difficult and in a free country you should be able to do whatever you want | ||
|
Hikko
United States1126 Posts
On February 08 2011 13:58 seupac wrote: i agree with op, this gun control in canada is out of control and we have the statistics to back it. our ability to murder each other is severely gimped and we cannot possibly compete with america's numbers due to our liberal gun legislation its a really good point that 34% of prisoners were scared off by their victims guns! im sure these prisoners are thankful that they all had access to weapons so that they could return fire. liberal gun laws make robbery much more difficult and in a free country you should be able to do whatever you want I think that has more to do with how cold it is in Canada, as there is a correlation between increased temperature and crime rates. In other words, people in Canada aren't killing each other as often because it's terribly cold most of the year. | ||
|
Earll
Norway847 Posts
Look at the homocide rates in The U.S compared to 'similar' european countries with stricter gun laws.The U.S basically has 10 times or more the amount of homocides :v. | ||
|
Drteeth
Great Britain415 Posts
On February 08 2011 14:18 Earll wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate Look at the homocide rates in The U.S compared to 'similar' european countries with stricter gun laws.The U.S basically has 10 times or more the amount of homocides :v. Agreed. | ||
|
[Eternal]Phoenix
United States333 Posts
On February 08 2011 14:18 Earll wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate Look at the homocide rates in The U.S compared to 'similar' european countries with stricter gun laws.The U.S basically has 10 times or more the amount of homocides :v. If there weren't guns those people would just use knifes or other weapons. Guns do not kill people. People kill people. | ||
|
Hikko
United States1126 Posts
On February 08 2011 14:18 Earll wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate Look at the homocide rates in The U.S compared to 'similar' european countries with stricter gun laws.The U.S basically has 10 times or more the amount of homocides :v. The chart you linked represents only firearm-based homicide. You are misreading it if you think that it means all homicide. Homicide Rate by Country (all types) Your point still stands, but I think that there are a lot more reasons behind homicide rates than gun policies, including drug trafficking and cultural tendencies. | ||
|
Maenander
Germany4926 Posts
On February 08 2011 14:21 [Eternal]Phoenix wrote: If there weren't guns those people would just use knifes or other weapons. Guns do not kill people. People kill people. That argument is so flawed. The inhibition threshold to pull a trigger from afar is obviously much lower than the one to charge someone with a knife. Never bring a knife to a debate about gun control ... | ||
palookieblue
Australia326 Posts
On February 08 2011 14:21 [Eternal]Phoenix wrote: Lax firearm laws make it far too easy for someone to harm others.If there weren't guns those people would just use knifes or other weapons. Guns do not kill people. People kill people. You could still go on a knifing rampage, sure, but you'd be stopped before your kill-streak got too high. What is stopping an unstable gunman from doing what he/she pleases in a crowded shopping centre? Also, the line 'guns do not kill people, people do' is ignorant and fallacious. A gun is a very deadly weapon which can cause a huge number of casualties before the assailant is stopped. The same cannot be said for fists and chairs. There are certain people I know, even associate with regularly, that I would 100% not want them to be able to access a gun. Australia learnt quickly following the Port Arthur massacre that guns and the general population don't mix, and since then we've had precious little firearm-related deaths. Gang-violence in Melbourne maybe, but statistically it is hardly significant. | ||
|
Zzoram
Canada7115 Posts
Maybe DC is just doing a shitty job enforcing their gun control laws. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States46339 Posts
On February 08 2011 14:21 [Eternal]Phoenix wrote: If there weren't guns those people would just use knifes or other weapons. Guns do not kill people. People kill people. Accessibility. How many people would *just use* a grenade instead of a gun? Let me just whip out my nuke. How are they going to get these other weapons? Easiness. If I want to hurt you, I'm not going to put myself in potential danger by getting close to you with a knife. I'm going to safely point a gun at you from a few feet away. Intimidation. It's a fucking gun. That means something. It's got a reputation. Even if I don't want to harm you, you'll most likely give me your possessions if I show you my gun. | ||
|
Zzoram
Canada7115 Posts
On February 08 2011 14:21 [Eternal]Phoenix wrote: If there weren't guns those people would just use knifes or other weapons. Guns do not kill people. People kill people. That's a stupid argument because guns make it easier to kill people, and whenever you lower the difficulty barrier, more people become willing to do something. It's WAY harder to kill someone with a knife than a gun. There is a much larger psychological barrier to killing a person up close and feeling their blood soak your hand, as opposed to shooting someone at a distance. Also, unless it's a sneak attack, the person you attack with a knife may fight back, struggling to keep your knife arm away. The person you shoot with a gun won't stand a chance. The problem with the US is they've gone so extreme about owning every type of gun. In Canada, I believe there was a year where we had more guns per capita than the USA. However, almost all guns in Canada are hunting rifles or shotguns for farmers and hunters. Those guns are almost never used for crime because you can't hide them when you run away, the giant gun is a dead giveaway that you're the criminal. In the US everyone loves handguns which are easy to conceal and are the weapon of choice for robberies and murder. | ||
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On February 08 2011 14:39 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Easiness. If I want to hurt you, I'm not going to put myself in potential danger by getting close to you with a knife. I'm going to safely point a gun at you from a few feet away. That's just not a realistic statement. The US is higher on gun crimes per capita but it's also higher in violent crimes per capita. Blaming guns, in a way, is a fleeting solution to what's actually a bigger problem in America- for a plethora of reasons, American society is more violent than other first world countries. It's folly to think the violence issues in America are simply due to lax or unenforced gun laws. They might help in one specific area, but that's not the core of the problem. EDIT: And this is coming from someone who hates the Second Amendment. | ||
|
Moody
United States750 Posts
On February 08 2011 14:18 Earll wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate Look at the homocide rates in The U.S compared to 'similar' european countries with stricter gun laws.The U.S basically has 10 times or more the amount of homocides :v. But I would assume similar European countries don't have kids growing up wanting to be gangster and live the 'thug lyfe.' Source: + Show Spoiler + | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States46339 Posts
On February 08 2011 14:42 Jibba wrote: That's just not a realistic statement. The US is higher on gun crimes per capita but it's also higher in violent crimes per capita. Blaming guns, in a way, is a fleeting solution to what's actually a bigger problem in America- for a plethora of reasons, American society is more violent than other first world countries. It's folly to think the violence issues in America are simply due to lax or unenforced gun laws. They might help in one specific area, but that's not the core of the problem. I don't understand why your statement is a response to that particular quote of mine. Can you please explain? You don't think that shooting someone with a gun is easier and safer for the criminal than stabbing the victim? If I wanted to harm someone and I could use either a gun or a knife, I think the choice would be a simple one. I don't think that guns are the only reason why we have violence in America, nor have I ever said that. I'm just saying that guns make it easier to kill people. | ||
|
maliceee
United States634 Posts
On February 08 2011 14:41 Zzoram wrote: That's a stupid argument because guns make it easier to kill people, and whenever you lower the difficulty barrier, more people become willing to do something. It's WAY harder to kill someone with a knife than a gun. There is a much larger psychological barrier to killing a person up close and feeling their blood soak your hand, as opposed to shooting someone at a distance. Also, unless it's a sneak attack, the person you attack with a knife may fight back, struggling to keep your knife arm away. The person you shoot with a gun won't stand a chance. Until people realize how much culture/regions/accessibility matter in this debate, it won't go anywhere. The emptiness in half of canada compared to the dozens of inner city areas and sophisticated crime in the US makes Canada/US incomparable. | ||
|
dogabutila
United States1438 Posts
On September 25 2006 16:48 RobOwns wrote: Edit: Hold on. With more firearms comes more deaths. That's an inherent fact. However, you can't present this as conclusive evidence without some kind of control group to compare it to. So, for example, how would things change (or would they stay the same?) as the number of firearms decreases? We don't know. We can only speculate. I just wanted to point out that chart is inconclusive and shouldn't be taken as any kind of concrete statement. What? The number of guns I have sitting on the coffee table next to me does not in any way corrolate to more people dying. You could arm everybody in the country without anybody(figuitively) dying due to gun crime. See Switzerland. On September 25 2006 17:23 pirate cod wrote: I'm still a bit unsure why exactly you need guns for anything if you're a civilian. To protect yourself? From who? I've walked through rough parts of New Jersey and and New York at awful times of the night and have never held a gun in my life and if I were to be in trouble I cannot say holding a gun would change things for the better. Someone explain to me a situation where you actually need a gun that would otherwise alter a lifethreatening outcome. You're being mugged on the street by gun point. He's not out to kill you, but you take out your gun to protect yourself and he shoots you. Guys out to kill you, he shoots you, what use is that gun. Ban all guns seems like a good solution. While the obvious thug would still be able to get his hands on a gun, logic tells me even while warranting those exceptions, banning guns would be for the better. Who is supposed to protect you if you deny responsibility? Look up Warren vs D.C. Even if police were supposed to protect you, seconds count when the police are only minutes away. If I'm being mugged on the street by a guy at gunpoint I pull a gun and shoot him. He doesnt shoot me, that simple. Everybody has this (false) idea that a person will always be shot if his gun is in the holster vs a person who already has a gun out. This is a myth. Look at any convenience store robbery camera when the cashier was armed. | ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On February 08 2011 14:45 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: I don't understand why your statement is a response to that particular quote of mine. Can you please explain? You don't think that shooting someone with a gun is easier and safer for the criminal than stabbing the victim? If I wanted to harm someone and I could use either a gun or a knife, I think the choice would be a simple one. I don't think that guns are the only reason why we have violence in America, nor have I ever said that. I'm just saying that guns make it easier to kill people. Because people DO take the risk to commit other types of crimes. That was my point. It's not just because of guns that people commit crimes. Americans generally commit more crimes regardless of the weapon they're using. Anyways, I'm closing this down. We don't need another gun control debate and more importantly, we all got trolled by tdot. >.> | ||
| ||
![[image loading]](http://focus.hms.harvard.edu/2002/March8_2002/courtney_chart.gif)
